ROGER GOODELL SAYS SAINTS' BOUNTY SCANDAL PROOF WILL BE MADE PUBLIC (http://www.cbssports.com/nfl/blog/eye-on-football/19125682/roger-goodell-says-saints-bounty-scandal-proof-will-be-made-public)

"Earlier this month, New Orleans linebacker Jonathan Vilma (/nfl/players/playerpage/493101/jonathan-vilma) was <a href="http://www.cbssports.com/nfl/blog/eye-on-football/18983892/jonathan-vilma-anthony-hargrove-will-smith-scott-fujita-appeal-suspensions">suspended
for the 2012 season</a> for his role in the Saints (/nfl/teams/page/NO/new-orleans-saints) bounty scandal. Last
week, Vilma's attorney <a href="http://www.cbssports.com/nfl/blog/eye-on-football/19075375/jonathan-vilma-files-defamation-lawsuit-vs-roger-goodell-in-new-orleans-federal-court">filed
a defamation lawsuit</a> against NFL commissioner Roger Goodell.

The
complaint read, in part, that "Vilma seeks to recover damages for defamatory
statements made by Roger Goodell, Commissioner of the National Football League.
… Goodell, speaking publicly about certain Saints executives, coaches and
players, in relation to purported efforts designed to injure opposing players,
made public statements concerning Vilma which were false, defamatory and
injurious to Vilma's professional and personal reputation."

At issue:
the league hasn't released evidence showing that Saints players, coaches and
front-office members were involved in the <a href="http://eye-on-football.blogs.cbssports.com/mcc/blogs/entry/22475988/35064299">pay-for-performance
allegations leveled against them in early March</a>. <span class="nickname">@JonVilma51</span></p><div id="twitter-widget-4" class="tw-align-center twitter-tweet-rendered"><div class="twt-border"><blockquote class="twt-o twt-tweet hentry

On Tuesday at the league's spring meeting, Goodell said that the NFL plans
to release to the public proof of wrongdoing by those already punished for their
roles in the bounty scandal.

While the commissioner declined comment on
Vilma's defamation lawsuit, he offered a "Yes, I do," in response to a question
about whether he expected the evidence to be made public. Details via NFL.com (http://www.nfl.com/news/story/09000d5d82944897/article/roger-goodell-says-public-will-see-proof-of-bounties)'s
Gregg Rosenthal:</p>
<blockquote>Goodell pointed out that the league released facts in March and is
going through the appeals process with the NFL Players Association. He indicated
that the league won't release any more information publicly until the appeals
and grievance processes are finished.</blockquote>

Goodell added that the NFLPA "expressly told the players not to cooperate in
the bounty investigation. I invited them in and they decided not to do that," he
said.

As the appeals and grievance process plays out, Goodell remains
the target of criticism for players.

"You don't worry about a popularity
contest," he said. "You can't. You can't make everyone happy on this."

Lessening the pain for the commissioner? <a href="http://www.cbssports.com/mcc/blogs/entry/22475988/34879880">Pulling down
$20 million a year</a>. And if all that money doesn't fill the void, <a href="http://www.sbnation.com/2012-nfl-draft/2012/4/26/2979022/roger-goodell-hugs-video-2012-nfl-draft">there's
always the draft</a> (cue "Dust in the Wind").</p>

NYGRealityCheck

05-23-2012, 06:26 PM

Goodell is letting Vilma, his attorney, and the NFLPA know that he'll be well-equipped for the courts and that they will not win.

RoanokeFan

05-23-2012, 06:54 PM

Goodell is letting Vilma, his attorney, and the NFLPA know that he'll be well-equipped for the courts and that they will not win.

The defamation case is a non-starter. The reason it's been filed t to see if Goodell will blink and/or reduce the suspension. His indicating that he will release the evidence to the public could be check-mate.

NYGRealityCheck

05-23-2012, 08:16 PM

Goodell is letting Vilma, his attorney, and the NFLPA know that he'll be well-equipped for the courts and that they will not win.

The defamation case is a non-starter.* The reason it's been filed t to see if Goodell will blink and/or reduce the suspension.* His indicating that he will release the evidence to the public could be check-mate.

I agree.

I have a couple of situational questions regarding Vilma since he's suspended for one season. It's just for personal knowledge, could care less about Vilma.

So... With Vilma being suspended for one season without pay (http://www.spotrac.com/nfl/new-orleans-saints/jonathan-vilma/), do the Saints still take the cap hit for his 2012 salary?
Since the Saints organization is involved with the scandal, I think it would be appropiate, but I don't think that's the case.

Can the Saints cut Vilma from their roster and get someone else that can contribute in the 2012 season so the 2012 team does not get affected by the player suspension? (I think so.)

RoanokeFan

05-23-2012, 09:35 PM

Goodell is letting Vilma, his attorney, and the NFLPA know that he'll be well-equipped for the courts and that they will not win.

The defamation case is a non-starter. The reason it's been filed t to see if Goodell will blink and/or reduce the suspension. His indicating that he will release the evidence to the public could be check-mate.

I agree.

I have a couple of situational questions regarding Vilma since he's suspended for one season. It's just for personal knowledge, could care less about Vilma.

So... With Vilma being suspended for one season without pay (http://www.spotrac.com/nfl/new-orleans-saints/jonathan-vilma/), do the Saints still take the cap hit for his 2012 salary?
Since the Saints organization is involved with the scandal, I think it would be appropiate, but I don't think that's the case.

Can the Saints cut Vilma from their roster and get someone else that can contribute in the 2012 season so the 2012 team does not get affected by the player suspension? (I think so.)

Vilma is under contract so they are at least accountable for any guarantee. Practically speaking, how wise would it be to cut a guy who did the OC's bidding (as it appears) in the bounty case.

I don't see how a salary not paid can count against the CAP but it's a good question. I believe a suspended player does not eat up a roster spot while suspended.